Suppr超能文献

体外照射放疗与近距离放疗联合应用对显微镜下切缘阳性的肢体高级别软组织肉瘤患者局部控制及伤口并发症的影响。

The effect of combined external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy on local control and wound complications in patients with high-grade soft tissue sarcomas of the extremity with positive microscopic margin.

作者信息

Alekhteyar K M, Leung D H, Brennan M F, Harrison L B

机构信息

Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Brachytherapy Service, Department of Biostatistics, New York, NY, USA.

出版信息

Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1996 Sep 1;36(2):321-4. doi: 10.1016/s0360-3016(96)00331-8.

Abstract

PURPOSE

A previously reported randomized trial from out institution demonstrated a local control advantage to adjuvant brachytherapy (BRT) for completely resected high grade soft tissue sarcoma (STS). In recent years, BRT boost has been combined with wide field external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for selected patients in whom the margin(s) of resection was positive. This study evaluates the impact of BRT boost plus EBRT on local control in this subset of patients and on wound complication rates.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between January, 1987 and December, 1992, 105 adult patients with primary or locally recurrent high grade STS of the extremity were treated with wide local excision and BRT alone (87 patients; dose: 45 Gy) or BRT plus EBRT (18 patients; dose: 15-20 Gy BRT + 45-50 Gy EBRT). The margin(s) of resection was positive in 10 out of 18 patients in the BRT + EBRT group vs. 17 out of 87 patients in the BRT alone group. Wound complications were classified as major if they required further operative intervention; moderate if there was purulent discharge, hematoma > 25 ml, wound separation > 2 cm, and persistent seroma requiring drainage; or minor if less than moderate. Median follow-up was 22 months.

RESULTS

The overall 2-year actuarial local control rate was 86%. There was no difference in the 2-year actuarial local control rate between the BRT + EBRT group (90%) and the BRT alone group (82%) (9 = 0.32). However, for patients with positive resection margins the use of BRT + EBRT produced better local control than BRT alone [9 out of 10 (90%) vs. 10 out of 17 (59%)]. This difference approached but did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.08). No difference was seen in patients with negative margins. There was no significant difference in the overall wound complication rate (26% BRT vs. 38% BRT + EBRT, p = 0.31) nor in the combined major and moderate wound complication rate (16% BRT vs. 27% BRT + EBRT, p = 0.39).

CONCLUSION

Our preliminary data suggest a trend in favor of BRT boost + EBRT as the optimal adjuvant local strategy for STS with positive resection margins. There is no significant difference in the wound complication rate with either technique.

摘要

目的

我们机构之前报道的一项随机试验表明,辅助近距离放射治疗(BRT)对完全切除的高级别软组织肉瘤(STS)具有局部控制优势。近年来,对于部分切除边缘阳性的患者,BRT增敏已与大野外照射放疗(EBRT)联合应用。本研究评估BRT增敏联合EBRT对该亚组患者局部控制及伤口并发症发生率的影响。

方法与材料

1987年1月至1992年12月期间,105例患有四肢原发性或局部复发性高级别STS的成年患者接受了广泛局部切除,其中单独接受BRT治疗的有87例(剂量:45 Gy),接受BRT联合EBRT治疗的有18例(剂量:BRT 15 - 20 Gy + EBRT 45 - 50 Gy)。BRT联合EBRT组的18例患者中有10例切除边缘阳性,单独BRT组的87例患者中有17例切除边缘阳性。伤口并发症若需要进一步手术干预则分类为严重;若有脓性分泌物、血肿>25 ml、伤口裂开>2 cm以及持续性血清肿需要引流则分类为中度;若程度低于中度则分类为轻度。中位随访时间为22个月。

结果

总体2年精算局部控制率为86%。BRT联合EBRT组(90%)和单独BRT组(82%)的2年精算局部控制率无差异(χ² = 0.32)。然而,对于切除边缘阳性的患者,使用BRT联合EBRT的局部控制效果优于单独使用BRT [10例中的9例(90%)对17例中的10例(59%)]。这种差异接近但未达到统计学显著性(p = 0.08)。切除边缘阴性的患者未见差异。总体伤口并发症发生率无显著差异(单独BRT组为26%,BRT联合EBRT组为38%,p = 0.31),严重和中度伤口并发症合并发生率也无显著差异(单独BRT组为16%,BRT联合EBRT组为27%,p = 0.39)。

结论

我们的初步数据表明,对于切除边缘阳性的STS,BRT增敏联合EBRT作为最佳辅助局部治疗策略有一定趋势。两种技术的伤口并发症发生率无显著差异。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验